The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1887-07-02
BooDLERs AND THEIR METHODS,


everywhere. Perhaps this is natural enough,
as their objects and ends are the same yet it
is interesting to note how closely their modes
of operation resemble each other in different
cities. The ''boodler," the term is now
understood is largely the product of modern
municipal government He is combination
of corruptionist and political boss, dividing
his time between managing politics, in which
he assumes a sort of open-and-above- board
activity, and carrying out schemes to rob the
people. The boodler is generally pretty
smart sort of fellow. as it takes smart
to be successful rascal. But rascals are
never quite as smart as they think they are
and the professional boodler is pretty sure to
come to grief. soon or late. Familiarity with
! crime breeds contempt for law and immunity
| from punishment makes the boodler bold
until finally he does something so
audacious, fragrant and intolerable that
the law gets after him. Then he makes a
hard fight. He generally has money.
| or can command it, and a considerable per-
sonal following for where there is one boodler
of the boodler and corruptionist is that ''the
| fewer men you have in this politics the bet
| ter" but he must have enough to form a
body guard and carry out his DEGREES. When
| the boodler is arrested his henchmen try to
| make themselves useful in such ways as they
can, always of course, in the direction of
beating the law and defeating justice.
| Boodler lawyers always adopt the same tactics
! and line of defense, and in this again
| the similarity of boodler methods appears.
| The boodler lawyer is great stickler for
| Justice. All he wants is "a fair trial for my
| client" but, all the same, his efforts are
directed against a fair trial He knows
we'll as anybody that his client is scoundrel,
and that he is paid to get the boodler out of
the clutches of the law, and this he endeavors
to do by any and every means possible. The
resources Of the law very great in this
direction. 1t is splendid hiding place for
criminals who know its intricate passages
and win ding ways, and it takes very good
and very correct prosecutor to follow and
unearth them. If the prosecutor is in
secret sympathy with the defendant,
or if he be an assistant who has been privy
to some of the defendants crimes, and, per-
haps, has profted by them, then justice is in
hard luck. Not much can be expected from
that kind of prosecution. One favorite
Doodle method in defense is trying to get
ignorant jury, under the pretense of getting
an impartial one. The boodler lawyer assumes
that all honest men acquainted with current
events-that is, who read the newspapers
regard his client as a scoundrel, and,
quentlY, he tries to get jury of men who
have not read the newspapers, thinking that
such will be comparatively ignorant and
easily swayed. Of course, he may err in this,
but that is his theory. He calls this ignor-
ance impartiality, if an intelligent man
who had read the papers, and even formed an
opinion, could not judge fairly as to the
weight of evidence for against his client.
So he consumes great deal of time in trying
to get jury sufficiently ignorant for his pur
poses. So it in the Sharp case, in
defendant no good, and so it is in the
the cases now pending in Chicago. Attorneys
for the boodlers have been fighting every inch
of the ground just as Jake Sharps lawyers
did. But it is gratifying to observe that the
court in Chicago has very little patience with
it. The following extract is a sample of the
proceedings. One man summoned juror
had admitted reading the papers, and counsel
for the defense had challenged him:
'"The Court-You do not mean to say that
you would place more reliance on a newspaper
report than on the sworn evidence offered in
this caseP
.Witness-No don't think would.
'.The Court-Notwithstand the opinion
you have formed and those you have heard ex-
pressed, could you try the case on the evil
dence offered in this case and on that alone2
''Witness-Well, don't know.
"The Court-Well, you ought to know. You
are the man / am asking.
''Witness-Well / think / could.
''The Court-Don't you want to get off this
juryl
"Witness-Well, I would like to get off.
1.-THE Court-That is what thought Now,
is it your desire to get off this jury that makes
you answer as you have doneY
''Witness-No sir.
Colonel Munn-If your Honor please, we
desire to enter an exception to your Honor ex-
aiming the juror.
1.-THE Court-Very well, gentlemen; you
may enter all the exceptions you desire we
proceed. We want to get jury here if we
can get them.
Colonel Munn-So do we. We do not
want to be here any longer than can help
during the hot summer weather, but above all,
we want to have a fair and impartial jury.
'The Court shall see that you have
fair jury.
'"ro Witness-Can you try this the
evidence offer ed here and render fair and
impartial verdict on that alone2
''Witness-Yes. / think l can.
''The Court-The exception is overruled."
There were many passages of this kind, IL
Illustrating boodler methods under indictment.
They are the same everywhere. Booders and
corruptionists die hard, but when they are